China has released a set of guidelines on labeling internet content that is generated or composed by artificial intelligence (AI) technology, which are set to take effect on Sept. 1.

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Would it be more effective to have something where cameras digitally sign the photos? Then, it also makes photos more attributable, which sounds like China’s thing.

    • Dem Bosain@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 hours ago

      No, I don’t want my photos digitally signed and tracked, and I’m sure no whistleblower wants that either.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Of course not. Why would they? I don’t want that either. But we are considering the actions of an authoritarian system.

        Individual privacy isn’t relevant in such a country. However, it’s an interesting choice that they implement it this way.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Apart from the privacy issues, I guess the challenge would be how you preserve the signature through ordinary editing. You could embed the unedited, signed photo into the edited one, but you’d need new formats and it would make the files huge. Or maybe you could deposit the original to some public and unalterable storage using something like a blockchain, but it would bring large storage and processing requirements. Or you could have the editing software apply a digital signature to track the provenance of an edit, but then anyone could make a signed edit and it wouldn’t prove anything about the veracity of the photo’s content.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Hm, that’s true there’s no way to distinguish between editing software and photos that have been completely generated. It only helps if you want to preserve and modified photos. And of course, I’m making assumptions here that China doesn’t care very much about privacy.

      • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        That’s a different thing. C2PA is proving a photo is came from a real camera, with all the editing trails. All in a cryptographic manner. This in the topic is trying to prove what not real is not real, by self claiming. You can add the watermark, remove it, add another watermark of another AI, or whatever you want. You can just forge it outright because I didn’t see cryptographic proof like a digital sign is required.

        Btw, the C2PA data can be stripped if you know how, just like any watermarks and digital signatures.

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Stripping C2PA simply removes the reliability part, which is fine if you don’t need it. It is something that is effective when present and not when it isn’t.